High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/29705/2019disposed of

Ramesh Kumar v. State Of Haryana And Others

2019-10-16Mr. Justice Amit Rawal2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

Sr. No.: 167 Civil Writ Petition No.29705 of 2019 Date of Decision: October 16, 2019 Dr. Ramesh Kumar ..... PETITIONER

VERSUS

State of Haryana & others ..... RESPONDENTS . . .

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL . . .

PRESENT: - Mr. Deepak Girhotra, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Hitesh Pandit, Additional Advocate General, Haryana.

. . .

Amit Rawal, J (Oral) Prayer in the writ petition is for issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the earlier service rendered by the petitioner for pensionary benefits; for treating the same as service in continuity and to treat him under the old pension scheme and granting all other statutory benefits. Direction is also sought for grant of continuation of service rendered by the petitioner as Contractual Lecturer since 28.06.2005 and thereupon counting 4 years of service for promotion/ redesignation to the post of Assistant Professor.

AVIN KUMAR 2019.10.19 18:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP No.29705 of 2019 [2] Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner will be satisfied if a direction is issued to the 4th respondent-Pt.

B.D.

Sharma, University of Health Sciences, Rohtak, through its Director, to consider the representation dated 11.04.2019 (Annexure P-11) and reminder dated 19.07.2019 (Annexure P-12) within a stipulated period. Without going into the merits and demerits of the claim of the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to direct 4th respondent-Pt. B.D. Sharma, University of Health Sciences, Rohtak, through its Director, to consider the representation dated 11.04.2019 (Annexure P-11) and reminder dated 19.07.2019 (Annexure P-12) within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and shall pass a speaking order thereon, failing which respondent No.4 shall be liable to pay costs of `25,000/- to the petitioner. This condition of imposing costs is only to prevent petitioner running from pillar to post and avail remedy of contempt in case of noncompliance of directions issued by this Court. The writ petition stands disposed of with the above direction. (Amit Rawal) October 16, 2019 Judge avin Whether Speaking/ Reasoned:

Yes/ No Whether Reportable:

Yes/ No AVIN KUMAR 2019.10.19 18:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document